Thanks Alan, thats what I was looking for.Seems to me falling on a VF doesn't sound like a good idea, no matter what equipment you have...Maybe if we can't get proper arresters, we will just climb the NW ridge route and check it out from there... (we were going to do that as well anyway).C ya,Bruce

Feel like getting involved in the fray, so here are some thoughts and info.

Re the Via Ferrata in the Magaliesberg. I was contacted in about 2003 regarding this and various meetings were held with the owner of the property. Lofty and I did a recce of what we thought would be the best place to set up this via ferrata (climbing it via trad - actually pleasantly enjoyable), and submitted a report to the owner. Many moons and even years went by until the owner had obtained all the necessary permission. He eventually got someone else to build the route (which didn't go exactly where Lofty and I had suggested because he was bent on putting up a gangway) and the only knowledge i had that it was actually being built was when one of the builders called to ask advice because they kept on burning their drill bits! As Justin has posted, there is probably much more info on shelteredrock website. So in fact, this is probably the first real via Ferrata in the country which was designed to use shock absorbing devices. AFAIK, the owner did run it through the Magaliesberg Protection Association (MPA) and the relevant local authorities and got the necessary permission. My stance was always, that if I was to be involved in building it, there needed to be permission in writing. He was also absolutely bent on using the thickest staples and gear for maximum safety etc. AFAIK, he did not want the general public to use it, but was always going to provide a guide and charge for it.

Re the Berg via FerrataI think the MCSA should take a stand on issues like this. One of the reasons i think the MCSA is not growing is because there is a lack of leadership (i can say this, because i was one). It is extremely difficult to get consensus on polarised issues with a bunch of strong minded people, like one tends to find in the MCSA and climbers in general, and the only way to really take a stand is for someone with the balls to make the call. My view, if the first (and hence foremost) objective is to "to organise and facilitate mountaineering", and VFs fall under that then they should be pro this. But, they must also consider their other objectives around the lines of conservation.

I think there is enough place in the berg for something like a via ferrata and the precedent in another world heritage site (as Dean has mentioned like the Dolomites) should not be ignored.

Yet, what is not clear to me is what Alard et al did to try and get permission, and whether in fact they got permission from anyone. eg. Freestate. My legal understanding is that to change (or improve) anything on anyone's property, one needs their permission.

I also agree with some of the comments that people like Tristan have made, that i question to what extent people who are the custodians of certain places, actually know about what goes on in those places. Certainly, to me SA needs to look seriously at how to generate sustainable revenue from its assets. I am not for something like a cable car up the berg, but look at something like TM and the millions in revenue the cable car and related industry generate. So my broader comment to the KZN Ezemvelo folks is not to miss out on possible opportunities that something like a VF could bring to the area. And i really like the forward thinking of getting Alard et al to train guides, build paths etc, for what seems like not getting the proper permission. (in fact, the paths from the chain ladder to the top of the amphitheatre were in a terrible state when i was last there about 3 years ago.)

Lastly, i need to say something about the whole adventure aspect of climbing that is Snort's diatribe. I see VF's as being adventurous. In fact, i am confused by Snort's emails. On the one side i get the perception that he does not see VFs as being adventurous, yet in another post he talks about the big dangers involved. Does danger = adventure? Maybe the adventure Snort looks for is climbing trad routes the way they were first ascended. In takkies, rope tied around the waste, a couple of pitons, a couple of slings. I know Gavin does this sometimes on Angus Leppan, but in the photos i see that he then takes up smoking to calm those nerves....

AND I'd better come out of the closet now: it's getting crowded in any case sharing it with Snort and DarkHorse...:-}

I'd like to modify my earlier posts about breaking the rules.I still stand by my assertion that SOME rules are OK to break: as long as you are willing to suffer the consequences.However in the case of this VF, and with the advantage of hindsight too, I think that permission should have been obtained from whoever was affected by it: the stakeholders.Not just land owners, but ideally everybody.

Some have the right to a veto (land owners for example).Others might only be able to express an opinion: but at least they get asked.

So I agree with the guys who say it is not cool to build a VF on Parks land without permission.I got into this issue after the fact and my thinking was a bit rushed, and as I said coloured by being friends with Alard and his future cellmates, er partners.

And I think that now, after seeing the furore, that I think Alard and his partners in crime probably feel the same way in any case.Let someone who has never acted quickly without thinking everything out cast the first stone!!!

Remember that they had a small time window to do this and felt that asking for permission would be both a very long process and expensive.And they initially thought it was outside Parks land.When they learned that at least some was probably not, they forged ahead.Perhaps impetuous: but as the the French say: "toujours l'audace".

In any case, as Roland and others have said (me too), there are two issues here:- this specific VF, which is dominated by the permission issue- VF's in general

You can have reservations about this particular VF but not against VF's in general.And who knows, permission might well be obtained after the fact: is a bit painful this way tho!!!

I have an excellent document by the DAV (German Alpine Club) about VF's.Both how to plan them as well as technical specifications.Perhaps it can be put up on climb.co.za for better access?It is a public document.And in fact is a translation done by a friend of the original German.

The DAV is a HUGE organization: over 500,000 members!!So it does things pretty thoroughly: helps to have a large paid staff and a lot of cash!!

I also have a copy of the European Standard for VF energy absorbers: but that is a controlled document and cannot be put on the website.However I shall summarize it and perhaps the summary can be put on climb.co.za too??

The safety on the VF is yet another point, as touched on by some. This would be where the oppotunities for guiding and training comes in. Because to attempt a VF with ill informed beta, or improper gear could be fatal; good post on this Alan!

To the big red baboon though that claimed "The un-experienced hikers will safer than all you guys.." , eish bra, experience is priceless.

I have done lots of VF's and fun they are indeed but adventurous - not. Once you have done a few, unless you get vertigo they fail all the definitions in the dictionaries and all that which climbing represents to me and most if not all climbers I know. They are no more adventurous than abseil africa's rappel off fountain ledge:

AdventureFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaFor other uses, see Adventure (disambiguation).Activities such as hiking and exploring can be seen as adventurous.

An adventure is defined as an exciting or unusual experience; it may also be a bold, usually risky undertaking, with an uncertain outcome.[1]

Merriam Webster

1ad·ven·turenoun \əd-ˈven-chər\Definition of ADVENTURE1a : an undertaking usually involving danger and unknown risks

Perhaps if you are an unprepared hiker then a VF in the berg could indeed be extremely adventurous.

To me bouldering esp when it gets a little higher than 2m is more adventurous than any VF I have ever done.

Last edited by SNORT on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

I worked for 6 months in the Dolomites as a kind of VF guide, and while they are not technically difficult for most climbers (max about climbing grade 16 if not pulling on the cable) they still make for excellent big days out in the mountains. You find after doing many you start racing up them alone without necessarily clipping all the time, which is a nice feeling after roped climbing. For non climbers they are incredibly adventurous and rewarding, and a real tourist drawcard.

Post edit: We also hear of about 1 death every 3 years in the Dolomites on VFs, usually falls when not clipped in or exposure to bad weather. Lightning lights up a VF like nothing else!

Post edit 2: I'm not necessarily for or against this particular VF, as I know nothing about the affected area

What about the rescues and rescue systems in the Dolomites. These are done almost daily - obviously for all sorts of reasons and not just from VF's. My point is that there are extremely slick systems in place that were they to be any different, the Dolomites and the Alps in general would be a killing field. Despite this around a 100 people a year die in the Chamonix region alone.

Last edited by SNORT on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

What about the rescues and rescue systems in the Dolomites. These are done almost daily - obviously for all sorts of reasons and not just from VF's. My point is that there are extremely slick systems in place that were they to be any different, the Dolomites and the Alps in general would be a killing field.

Thats true, they call out the helicopter for absolutely anything, and are regularly pulling people off the mountain for running out of breath or twisting an ankle. By contrast in Australia (and maybe RSA?) climbing rescue is often run by unafflilated, unofficial (but experienced) climbers, and normally involves climbing in and carrying out in areas of no mobile phone coverage, so the consequences of inexperienced people having a crack at this type of thing might be considered greater.

SNORT wrote:

But the outcome is invariably assured if you have any common sense.

For many non-climbers probably not, we had to turn back at times for people too unfit or scared to continue (in some cases defying common sense!). I'd say it's as much of an adventure as an easy multi-pitch for a climber.

In the pics of both SA VFs(avalible on the web) it shows what looks like normal steel-reinforcement bar in used in the construction industry...used for rungs & attachment points for cables. I find this a bit suprising. Is this normal in Europe, as well?

Personaly VF(all) are unapealing, but I acsept that the path to outdoor pleasure is broad.

For many non-climbers probably not, we had to turn back at times for people too unfit or scared to continue (in some cases defying common sense!)

yes indeed. Can you imagine what is gonna happen in the Berg when some arbs rock up there (they may even have the correct kit) and they try to reverse it.

If you contrive an adventure, then it is a lot different than someone going out venturing forth, having an accident and then having to cut his own arm off to survive. In this case you have created artificial parameters that can set one up for failure. And the website implies that anyone can do it and that a rescue is at hand. That in my book is irresponsible and down right dangerous if not criminal.

Ever heard the expression crawl before you walk.

This is huge in a remote area!

I can think of 2 ideal places for VF's One in Platteklip gorge and one at or near the Cable car at Hartebeespoort dam. Start there, get people used to it and then go bigger.

To reply to Snort about his comments on "adventure", and perhaps other people in the closet

SNORT wrote:

Finally, splitting hairs I know - your comment

Quote:

for non climbers they are incredibly adventurous and rewarding, and a real tourist drawcard.

. Not my or the dictionary definition of adventure and especially if you are guided up it. Fun, thrilling, exciting, adrenalin rushing - whatever. But the outcome is invariably assured if you have any common sense. Some are probably in the same league as white water rafting on the Zambezi which is right out there with the best thrill I have ever had. (The steel frame on our raft bent at 90 degrees in one rapid and I spent 60 seconds submerged! - I counted).

What is an "adventure" to one person is common place to another: it's relative, and largely based on past experiences, skill level and knowledge of what's going on.

A few examples:- an astronaut on the Apollo launches did very little, unless something went wrong. Most was controlled from the ground. Are you saying THAT was not an "adventure"??- whatever you do, someone is always doing something more hardcore. Take an ascent on Mt Everest on a commercial trip. And take Reinhold Messner's solo no-oxygen ascent. When does it start becoming an adventure?- Snort, take your hardest trad climb up an established route. Couldn't one argue that the outcome is known, even if you reverse and back off? You know the route, your equipment is good, skill level high. The route is set: you've maybe even done it before. So is that not an "adventure"? - a blind guy walks across a field, he doesn't know if there are huge holes there. The outcome is not assured for HIM. Is it an adventure?

You do a trip thru Africa in a 4x4. You think, hey check me, I'm an adventurer.Then you meet a guy who did it on a motorbike.Then HE/She meets someone who did it on a bicycle.Then someone who did it by walking.....Then another person by micro-light......

Using your definition either none or all could be adventures.All of them have varying degrees of skill, experience.

What's common sense got to do with it?Well, maybe I'd say doing something WITHIN your envelope of skill/experience/equipment is "common sense".So does that mean it's NOT an "adventure"??

If a good kayaker goes down a Class 4, it's no big deal.If a novice does it????

Is standing up in front of a room full of experts and delivering a paper an "adventure"????Does something have to have a degree of personal risk to one's body to qualify as an adventure???

I think the comments about people going up VF's and saying that they are not having an adventure are elitist: but perhaps the guys with dictionaries can pick a better word? How do you think some guy like Reinhold Messner views our exploits???Hopefully he doesn't look down his nose at us.

If you can climb Grade 25 on trad then perhaps you might see climbing VF's as no big deal.But can't you take a nice walk in the mountains and enjoy it?Does it always have to be hard core???Is it relevant that it's an adventure or not? Who cares?

And as I've said, is maybe not hard core to YOU, but to the people who do a lot of VF's, they LOVE it.

Going down the Zambezi in a raft to a good kayaker is fun, but perhaps not an adventure: for THEM.Going off a 60m waterfall is.Or down a Class 6 run.Hopefully they don't look down their nose at your tale of being on a raft and being under for 60 seconds.For them, downtime is common.

Who cares how you define "adventure"???If it's confusing to some people, then just substitute the word "fun".

I DO like the point of risk/benefit tho: that's related to common sense when you are talking person danger.And I do agree that some things should not be set-up in some areas: too much damage to the fragile environment for the return.

Your idea of a VF in a more populated area sounds great.As the DAV guidelines say, VF's need to consider their effect on their surroundings.Perhaps having a tricky VF in an area that's hard to rescue people from is NOT a good idea: good comment.

There is adventure and there is canned adventure. True adventures at any level primarily depends on the adventurers personal, skill and experience and tolerance of risk. Canned adventure is when all the parameters are contrived and controlled by third parties. VF's Bungies and Guided climbs at any level are all controlled by third parties and usually for fees paid.

Last edited by SNORT on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

And as for Reinhold Messner, read his famous "Murder of the Impossible" written in 1971. He had no problem with defeat. What is possible for him may not be possible for others and what is possible for Alex Honold must be not be possible for Messner. What a VF does is murder the impossible for everyone, or at least almost everyone.

What have I personally got against "direttissimas"? Nothing at all; in fact I think that the "falling drop of water" route is one of the most logical things that exists. Of course it always existed - so long as the mountain permits it. But sometimes the line of weakness wanders to the left or the right of this line; and the we see climbers - those on the first ascent , I mean - going straight on up as if it weren't so, striking in bolts of course. Why do they go that way? "For the sake of freedom," they say; but they don't realize that they are slaves of the plumbline.

They have a horror of deviations. "In the face of difficulties, logic commands one not to avoid them, but to overcome them," declares Paul Claudel. And that's what the 'direttissma' protagonists say, too, knowing from the start that the equipment they have will get them over any obstacle. They are therefore talking about problems which no longer exist. Could the mountain stop them with unexpected difficulties? They smile: those times are long past! The impossible in mountaineering has been eliminated, murdered by the direttissima.

Yet direttissimas would not in themselves be so bad were it not for the fact that the spirit of that guides them has infiltrated the entire field of climbing. Take a climber off a rock face, iron rungs beneath his feet and all around him only yellow, overhanging rock. Already tired, he bores another hole above the last peg. He won't give up. Stubbornly, bolt by bolt, he goes on. His way, and none other, must be forced up the face.

Expansion bolts are taken for granted nowadays; they are kept to hand just in case some difficulty cannot be overcome by ordinary methods. Today's climber doesn't want to cut himself off from the possibility of retreat: he carries his courage in his rucksack, in the form of bolts and equipment. Rock faces are no longer overcome by climbing skill, but are humbled, pitch by pitch, by methodical manual labor; what isn't done today will be done tomorrow. Free-climbing routes are dangerous, so the are protected by pegs. Ambitions are no longer build on skill, but on equipment and the length of time available. The decisive factor isn't courage, but technique; an ascent may take days and days, and the [i]pegs and bolts counted in the hundreds. Retreat has become dishonorable, because everyone knows

now that a combination of bolts and singlemindedness will get you up anything, even the most repulsive-looking direttissima.[/i]

Times change, and with them concepts and values. Faith in equipment has replaced faith in oneself; a team is admired for the number of bivouacs it makes, while the courage of those who still climb "free" is derided as a manifestation of lack of conscientiousness.

Who has polluted the pure spring of mountaineering?

The innovators perhaps wanted only to get closer to the limits of possibility. Today, however, every single limit has vanished, been erased. In principle, it didn't seem to be a serious matter, but ten years have sufficed to eliminate the word 'impossible' from the mountaineering vocabulary.

Progress? Today, ten years from the start of it all, there are a lot of people who don't care where they put bolts, whether on new routes or on classic ones. [b][i]People are drilling more and more and climbing less and less.[/i][/b]

"Impossible": it doesn't exist anymore. The dragon is dead, poisoned, and the hero Siegfried is unemployed. Not anyone can work on a rock face, using tools to bend it to his own idea of possibility.

Some people foresaw this a while ago, but they went on drilling, both on direttissimas and on other climbs, until the lost the taste for climbing: why dare, why gamble, when you can proceed in perfect safety? And so they become the prophets of the direttissima: "Don't waste your time on classic routes - learn to drill, learn to use your equipment. Be cunning: If you want to be successful, use every means you can get round the mountain. The era of direttissima has barely begun: every peak awaits its plumbline route. There's no rush, for a mountain can't run away - nor can it defend itself."

"Done the direttissima yet? And the super diretissima?" These are the criteria by which mountaineering prowess is measured nowadays. And so the young men go off, crawl up the ladder of bolts, and then ask the next ones: "done the direttissima yet?"

Anyone who doesn't play ball is laughed at for daring take a stand against current opinion. The plumbline generation has already consolidated itself and has thoughtlessly killed the ideal of the impossible. Anyone who doesn't oppose this makes himself an accomplice of the murderers. When future mountaineers open their eyes and realize what has happened, it will be too late: the impossible (and with it, risk) will be buried, rotted away, and forgotten forever.

All is not yet lost, however, although 'they' are returning the attack; and even if it's not always the same people, it'll be other people similar to them. Long before they attack, they'll make a great noise, and once again any warning will be useless. They'll be ambitious and they'll have long holidays - and some new 'last great problem' will be resolved. They'll leave more photographs at the hut, as historical documents, showing a dead straight line of dots running from the base to summit - and on the face itself, will once again inform us that "Man has achieved the impossible."

If people have already been driven to the idea of establishing a set of rules of conduct, it means that the position is serious; but we young people don't want a mountaineering code. On the contrary, "up there we want to find long, hard days, days when we don't know in the morning what the evening will bring". But for how much longer will we be able to have this?

I'm worried about that dead dragon: we should do something before the impossible is finally interred. We have hurled ourselves, in a fury of pegs and bolts, on increasingly savage rock faces: the next generation will have to know how to free itself from all these unnecessary trappings. We have learned from the plumbline routes; our successors will once again have to reach the summits by other routes. It's time we repaid our debts and searched again for the limits of possibility - for we must have such limits if we are going to use the virtue of courage to approach them. And we must reach them. Where else will be able to find refuge in our flight from the oppression of everyday humdrum routine? In the Himalaya? In the Andes? Yes certainly if we can get there; but for most of us there'll only be these old Alps.

So let's save the dragon; and in the future let's follow the road that past climbers marked out. I'm convinced it's still the right one.

Put on your boots and get going. If you've got a companion, take a rope with you and a couple of pitons for your belays, but nothing else. I'm already on my way, ready for anything - even for retreat, if I meet the impossible. I'm not going to be killing any dragons, but if anyone wants to come with me, we'll go to the top together on the routes we can do without branding ourselves murderers.

Last edited by SNORT on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

When comparing it to climbing, sure its not an adventure, but i'm sure hundreds of hikers will do the VF and it will be an adventure of a lifetime!To me the initial research shows that the VF is not in the national park and based on that I'd say well done Allard and his partners in crime for making the effort to put it up and making as unique experience possible for everyone...I also want to thank Allard (and his team agian) for bolting "paradigms shift" on Sentinal.. an awesone route!

I just love climbing, trad, sport whatever.. and I will definitely do this VF sometime and i'm sure it will be a fun day in the mountains!

I understand that the VF follows the last three pitches of an existing trad route & the RDs for two existing routes on that buttress are well publicised on the MCSA-KZN web pages and in the official Berg route guide. Apparently the VF web page RDs uses several of the same phrases as are mentioned in the RD for the existing route.

An effort was made to avoid the one existing route on the buttress. In fact the last section of the route goes very far away from the existing route which has a route description as follows :" Walk up to the final rocky section and scramble to the top (200 m C) keeping to the left as far as possible."Alard

1) Basic geography. The border between KZN and the Freestate at this point follows a watershed. (look up watershed if you do not know what it is) Every drop of rain that lands on the VF then runs down a slope and into the Tugela River. Therefore its in KZN. 2) If it were outside the National Park, it is still illegal and very un-cool to erect any structure just on the border of someone else's property .

3) I have climbed the Trad route (Beacon Buttress, NW Ridge) and I have climbed the VF. What do I find. Part of pitch 3 and and all of 4 and part of the scramble now has cables and support bars all over it. It is just disgusting that a bunch of people can arrive on a World Heritage Site, not bother to check things out or get permission, get warned that there are going to big problems, stuff relations with a whole bunch of climbers, then claim that their route does not go near an existing Trad route. The people who did this need to get with the program. The Trad route is so easy to work out where it goes. Any idiot could sit there with an RD and do it. I suspect they knew exactly what they were doing, they just did not care. They did not care about what would happen to climbers access in other areas of the park, so why worry about someones route. As Alard said to me on the phone and I quote" I am just going to have my fun".

Besides what the owners of the land and the "authorities" think, say and do, one of the serious consequences is that it also polarizes the climbing community and diminishes our influence on how these areas are accessed and utilized. This is the complete antitheses to one of stated reasons for setting this up in the first place which was to make our sport more recognizable and more influential.

Last edited by SNORT on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Hi GavinThe intention was not for the VF to clash with your route. But as it seems the VF does share sections of your route.I apologies for this.That is bad style and I will make sure the Via Ferrata gets shifted to avoid direct contact with your route.On some sections of your route we struggled to follow your route description to such an extent that we returned with someone who had climbed your route before, to help us to try and avoid your route.The VF probably clashes with your route on the section “Walk up to the final rocky section and scramble to the top (200 m C) keeping to the left as far as possible.” It is a fairly big ridge with many ways to scramble 200m to the top. We chose a line. Alard

As some of you may have realised I absolutely f!#@%$ hate going to sleep. I have had small taste of what the backlash from the "commmunity" can be for doing something you thought to be good at the moment, so my comments are made with respect knowing Alard is a seasoned climber, and having met "topknot" and knowing the effort he puts into keeping our asses safe - so here's my rant and semi-uneducated opinion:

Sitting on the sidelines (because I don't know the area or the style of climbing) I'm sorry to say that this seems to have turned out to be yet another case of an individual, or a small group of people who's actions may end up jeopardising access for a lot of other people.

Until proven otherwise, uncool guys. Really, freakin uncool.

I get the ultimate argument that in the end this is part of the "commons" that has been monetized (even if under the guise of preservation) by who-ever the shifting powers may be and that we the commoners should have equal access - which just tempts me to go into a rant about how we as a society forgot that the powers-that-be are there by our grace, not the other way around.

Having said that, it means that how ever long way around, we chose that those rules be made, so if we feel like changing it we need to follow pretty much the same roundabout way to get it changed. Anything else would be living by double standards - give a thought to how many of the same sorta rules you take for granted (and rely on) every day. If the guys got shut down while trying to get permission from the park and having a solid backing from the hiking / climbing / outdoor community to do so, by all means, do the civil disobedience thing. Until then you're breaking the law AND f*cking it up for the rest of us.

Alard, correction. Its not my route. Its Gavin Peckham and Ivan van Cleef. My name appears in the book only because I once pointed out the line a few years before they climbed it.

Regarding the VF. Sorry but I don't believe somone was taken up there who had climbed the Trad route, to check that the 2 did not clash. Then I ask why did you phone me and ask where the route started and went? On pitches 3-4 there is only one place that a moderate Trad route can climb that buttress, anyone could work where the NW line went.The C grade scramble in minor compared.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum